Beatles mono vinyl box - sound comparison to Parlophone originals only

Here's what Steve Guttenberg of The Audiophiliac wrote about the 2014 reissues compared to originals, for what it's worth:

"I own a ton of stereo British and American pressed Beatles albums, but just two original mono British pressings, "Rubber Soul " and "Revolver." Both of these are in excellent condition so they were called into service for comparison listening tests. My old LPs sounded a tad more compressed and less clear, the 2014 versions were more three-dimensional. Obviously, they were much quieter, and there was more depth and body to the sound of voices and instruments. I felt like I was listening back through time and tapping into more of the Beatles' energy. Vocals are more present and, for lack of a better word, complete."

Full review here.

 

This differs from my experience. The vocals are more veiled on the 2014 Revolver.

 

Now to Help
I have a NM (almost mint cover and LP) Y&B original UK first press of Help. Side 1 XEX 549 -2 (Mother 710, stamper GGR) Side 2 XEX 550 -2 (Mother 18, stamper GAG. Tube cut.

The cover: They did an excellent job in the reproduction (other than the lamination). On the 2014 re-master cover, the navy cloths the Beatles are wearing is slightly darker and the EMI logo on the left upper corner is definitely less sharp than the original while the cover is few millimeters wider. Otherwise excellent cover and photos on the back.

The LP physically: Shiny, flat, clean, no marks.

The music: The original is cut louder and I had to increase the volume on the 2014 re-master to listen at the same dB (around 90-96). As I have been doing, I listen to the song on the original first then listen to it again on the re-master. The song "Help" on the master is clearer but seems farther soundstage wise than the original. The original has a muddy midrange. When I got to "I Need You", George voice was much more dominant and separate from the backing vocals of John and Paul, seemed warmer and much closer. So when I listened to the re-master, I could not but go back to the original UK LP and play the song again as I was mesmerized by the vocals - superb. So "I Need You" is definitely better to my ears on the original LP. On "Ticket to Ride", the original had more punch and heavy presence which I enjoyed more. Ringo's voice on "Act Naturally" was wonderful on both the original and the re-master. The biggest surprise was "Yesterday". Paul voice is so much clearer and sharper on the re-master that I preferred it to the original. In general, like the earlier LPs, there is a midrange boost in the original and forward presentation of the vocals on the originals. The Help re-master is an excellent LP and in some songs surpasses the original. I am amazed that the original LPs, pressed in 1965 still sound amazing on today's equipment. I am really enjoying listening to these LP and giving them my full attention. I would recommend again to listen to the re-masters at a loud sound level to appreciate the clarity, dynamic range and little nuances that make these songs great.

If you are reading this thread and still pondering on buying or not buying the re-master, do your self a favor and buy it.

 

Sounds like it could go either way on the album Help! A difficult album sonically to review for sure. Thanks!

 

Yeah, this is a dispiriting situation to me. I 'm thankful I acquired most of the original UK albums I wanted ( of all different artists) on Ebay from between around 2004 and 2008 when things were sanely priced. I think I probably paid $27 for my Pepper in great condition for example. Things are ridiculous now.

 

I have to agree that the vinyl manufacturing standards at the Hayes plant were very high in the 1960s. In my experience, 1960s UK Beatles pressings were made with the some quality and level of attention as EMI's classical LPs. And just because most old UK Beatles records are now heavily worn doesn't mean that they weren't exquisite when new.

• The original records were made on manually operated pressing machines--true hand craftsmanship. I have a theory that those old pressing machines affected the vibrancy of the sound in a positive way.

• Until the late 1960s, labels on the disc were carefully lined up so that the matrix was at 6 o'clock and that both sides lined up exactly the same. This was meticulously done to prevent warping, I've also noticed that 60s EMI pressings with warps of any kind are quite rare.

•The pressings are heavyweight, 150 to 175 grams is not uncommon.

•Many records came in nice, scratch resistant polylined sleeves.


To me, these are features that would be commonly associated in the modern era with audiophile grade pressings.

 

The majority of the 1980s UK albums were tube cuts? Here's the info I've got:

UK Tube Cut Mono
PPM -1N/-1N, -1N/-2N
WTB -1N/-1N, -3N/-3N, -4N/-4N, -5N/-5N, -6N/-6N, -7N/-7N
AHDN -3N/-3N
BFS -3N/-3N, -4N/-4N
Help -2/-2
RS -1/-1, -4/-4, -5/-5
Rev -2/-1, -2/-2, -2/-3
Oldies -1G/-1G
Sgt P -1/-1
TB -1/-1/-1/-1, -2/-2/-3/-2, -2/-2/-4/-2
YS -1/-1 (mono fold down from the stereo master)


And here's something you posted in February (#21):
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/the-beatles-1982-mono-reissues.343296/

"Here's a list I compiled for the newer cuts that can appear in a typical BMC10 box set.

PPM -3 Side 1
WTB -8/-8
BFS -5 Side 1
Help -3 Side 1
RS -6 Side 1
Rev -3/-4
Sgt P beware of the mispressed Side 2 with YEX 638-6 stereo stamper
TB -4 Side 3
YS -2 Side 2, note the UK mono is a fold down cut from the stereo master tape

As you can see it's possible to get a set with almost half of the sides mastered in the 80's.
Most of recuts are easy to spot, having HTM initials in the dead wax."

I guess I'm missing something between "...the majority of the 1980s UK albums were pressed from original 1960s tube cuts..." and "As you can see it's possible to get a set with almost half the sides mastered in the 80s" in a typical set.

How are you coming up with "...the majority of the 1980s UK albums were pressed from original 1960s tube cuts..." when you just posted a few months ago that a typical set contains nearly half its sides as 80s recuts?
I guess I am completely missing something.

It sounds like I got one of the 'typical' sets you described in February.

Whether or not the 1980s box contained tube cuts, half tube/half solid state or dubs from a cassette machine is really neither here nor there as far as I was concerned. The WA on that set, which was in NM condition--the entire box was NM, really sounded dull and muddy. At the time I also had an '82 Japan EMI/Odeon mono WA that I thought was much better. I later acquired a UK original WA mono that to my ears was entirely better either of the two previously mentioned issues, clearer and with a far more satisfying top end and 'realness' to the voices. The UK '82 mono just did not sound very good to me except, IIRC, RS, which may have been a ~4/~4 in that box. Those issues were very 'thin' sounding to me -- they had none of the fullness I associated with originals, for whatever reason. I'm confident they still don't, but since we now have such high quality reissues that is a moot point as far as I am concerned since I have no reason to revisit that series, nor the 1982 Japan EMI/Odeon red vinyl mono series, which at the time I thought was significantly better.

Helpful or not, I unhesitatingly recommend the 2014 mono vinyl, YMMV. It really concludes my mono vinyl search as far as The Beatles are concerned.

Apologies if that is not helpful.

 

That old laminate can be readhered with a little heat (not a lot), some silicone release paper, and a tacking iron. Or something similar. Takes a bit of practice (not on Beatles records).

 

Yeah, the majority of the 198os UK mono albums were tube cut.

They released the monos as individual LP titles in the UK (also imported into Australia) in mid 1981, and at that time nearly all were pressed from 1960s tube cut stampers.
By late 1982 when the mono box set was compiled, many sides had been recut in the interim on a solid state lathe, but even then over half were still pressed from the original metal, and that's still counts as the majority, does it not?

The point I'm making is that the 1982 mono box is not a cohesive set, it's a hodge-podge of old and new mastering, so broad statements stating that whole set isn't warm or it's dark are meaningless unless you point out which ones you're referring to; is it an old cut or a new cut?
To me, it would be helpful to know which ones you mean.

 

Could we possibly see prices going down on Ebay for original UK pressings now we have these fantastic mono vinyl pressings

 

.

 

prices may go down or they may go up, but I do not think that these re-issues will have any noticable effect on the collecting market, prices will continue to dance to a tune that make little sense however as i have said before the audiophile element is imho a very small if not tiny part of the main collector market who will always go for an original artifact over any re-issue regardless. Thats not to say people not want their originals to sound great but it is not the prime consideration, it is their condition as an artifact that makes them most desirable. PS a " mint " original pressing will always command a premium but a near mint PLAYING original -4-4 RS for example can still be sourced on ebay on many occasions for under USD 50.

Actually RS is a very good example of the point I am making, -4-4 or -5-5 mono copies are generally regarded as the best sounding examples, yet almost everybody wants the -1-1 " loud cut " and they will always fetch higher prices than the -4-4 or -5-5 even though the audio quality of the -1-1 is regarded as inferior. QED. Of course the -1-1's are scarcer than the -4-4 but they are not really much scarcer than the -5-5's, and they are certainly are still not hard to find at all.

 

You explained that very well ....thank you....so it's a bit like stamp collecting.

 

many thks , exactly, indeed like stamps or coins etc etc.....its the artifact first and foremost for most collectors !

 

A penny black is worth a pretty penny.

 

I finally got my box set 2 days ago and I'm slowly digesting it. I have at least 2 original UK mono copies of everything plus some nice Australian and New Zealand copies as well. Initial quick thought is that the new pressings are very well done indeed and compare nicely with the originals. I'll have something more concrete to say after a bit more comparisons,

Bobby Sutliff

 

The more of one, the less of the other. Most of what we think of as "warmth" in sound hovers around 200 hz, a sonic region full of reflected sounds. Want more clarity? Depress the lower midrange slightly. More 'room sound'? More lower midrange sound. Are there other factors? Yes, but no other factor is as important.

 

Scored a nice EX condition mono -4 "Rubber Soul", off of Discogs last year. Price was just under $100 shipped from the UK. In the last 2 years, I've purchased several excellent examples of 1st pressing mono's(except WA) for $75-$100. Not all sellers are asking(or getting) $400+ for them.

 

that's the only reason i'm not selling mine. collectability. don't think prices are going to drop on these but also very satisfied with the reissues
RS -1/-1 LOUD CUT
revolver-2/-1 TNK variant
WA -1/-1/-3-/-1
pepper -1/-1

 

I suppose it is a bit like stamp collecting but you wouldn't lick a rare stamp and stick it on envelope. I still play my UK first and second pressing mono Beatles albums though and enjoy them. Or I should say I used to play them. I was doing some comparative listening yesterday with the white album from the box set and my original UK top loader. I believe the vocals, both lead and backing, are a little more in the front on the new album and I thought that there was more bass on the reissue. I'm so used to the originals that I'm going to quit playing them and play only the reissues to I can get a better feel for them. So far I've only played With The Beatles and The Beatles. All my records in the box set are perfect with no defects which I'm happy about. There was some discussion about the pressing or vinyl quality earlier about the original releases and I find the quality on my first and second pressings to be top notch as are the reissues IMO.

 

I just watched an original top loader white album just sell for $1600.00 on Ebay. I bought one just as nice as the one that just sold about four years ago for a fraction of that price. Just goes to show you that the value of an original won't do down.

 

I dare say my opinion won't make the slightest bit of difference to anyone, but for what its worth here it is anyway

I compared an original early pressing of " Sgt Pepper" XEX637-1/XEX638-1 with one from the new Mono Box Set. I bought the original at auction recently and its in excellent condition. The Mono Box is of course mint, I only opened it today.

The results were surprising based on some stuff I'd already gleaned from the internet. Punters options, Fremer etc

Yes there were some subtle differences,; that backing vocal is slightly louder, that kicks got more thump etc. but, and here's the bottom line, IMHO if ANYONE tells you the new Mono Box outperform an original pressing tell them to go take a running hike

ITS NOT EVEN CLOSE! The new remaster is glassy and less rewarding; it is hard where the original is effortless, smooth and relaxing. Less versus more musical.

The original has more depth of field and one can better understand where the music is going. " Mr Kite" for example is in technicolor, absolutely three dimensional. The new mono far less so!

There is a warmth to the strings particularly in the low end that's missing on the new remaster. Vocals are more believable. It just sounds real!

And before anyone asks, no I have no coin in the game. I'm not a dealer, I've hardly sold a record in my life, but I've certainly bought a few thousand.

Keep looking and buying the originals. Yes they're blooming expensive but they ARE worth it

Flame retarding hat on lol

 

If they affect any of the originals it'll likely be those in less than EX/NM shape. I find that great copies of rare records command a premium over those with a lesser grade by a large margin (generally speaking).

 

No need to get fireproof. Thats what you hear!

While I think the new lps are great, I also think the hype will die down some and a more reasonable analysis and concensus will be reached.